Catalog
| Issuer | Uncertain Etruscan mint |
|---|---|
| Year | 301 BC - 201 BC |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Bronze |
| Weight | Log in to see details |
| Diameter | Log in to see details |
| Thickness | Log in to see details |
| Shape | Log in to see details |
| Technique | Log in to see details |
| Orientation | Log in to see details |
| Engraver(s) | Log in to see details |
| In circulation to | Log in to see details |
| Reference(s) | Log in to see details |
| Obverse description | Log in to see details |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | TLAM (Translation: [Telamon?]) |
| Reverse description | Log in to see details |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Edge | Log in to see details |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | ND (301 BC - 201 BC) - Unique |
| Additional information |
The so-called "Telamon" designation for this series remains debated — some scholars tie it to the Battle of Telamon in 225 BC, where a Roman-led force crushed a Gaesatae-led Gallic coalition in Etruria, theorizing that nearby mints struck emergency or victory-related issues in the aftermath. That connection is unproven and contested. What is clearer is that the issuing authority remains genuinely unresolved, with attributions spread across several Etruscan centers depending on which catalog you trust.
Haeberlin's die studies remain the most rigorous framework for this group, though the corpus is small enough that new specimens still shift the picture.